The story of the bloc vote began ten years ago when a number of Muslim- and Arab-Americans and their supporters decided to make elections more effective for their community. The idea was that all members of the community would work together to ensure that they did not cancel out each other’s votes in each four-year election cycle. However, the endorsement was never made, and once again Republican and Democratic Arab- and Muslim-Americans simply canceled each other out.
Four years later, it was clear to all Muslim-Americans concerned about making their voices heard that there had to be some ground rules. Members of the Democratic and Republican parties were invited to exploratory meetings. But Democratic Party members would not even participate in the discussions, because they did not believe that the Muslim-American groups would be able to uphold the bloc vote in the 2000 elections. The Republicans made informal promises to take Muslim-and Arab-Americans into consideration in their policies, so Muslim-Americans and many Arab-Americans went Republican. The result was astonishing: because of the extraordinarily tight election in 2000, the bitterly contested vote finally went to the Republicans. In short, the bloc vote made the difference between George W. Bush’s election and Al Gore’s defeat.
One cannot say for sure how many people actually followed through with the bloc vote, but it was very apparent that in Florida a very large number of Muslim-and Arab-American voters took the bloc vote seriously, and decisively changed the election. Obviously, some Democrats now realize that if they had understood the strategic importance of the Muslim-American community, they might not have discounted their vote.
In the subsequent two years, many Arab-and Muslim-Americans have been deeply disappointed with Bush’s foreign policy decisions, which seem regularly to tilt toward Ariel Sharon’s viewpoint rather than that of Palestinians and their American supporters. They are also appalled that despite his campaign assurances, Bush’s administration has made extensive use of profiling and secret evidence in the wake of Sept. 11.
But the fact is that elections are carried out only every four years. It is only now that Democratic and Republican leaders are thinking through what will happen in 2004. There are a minimum of 7.5 million Muslim Americans, and perhaps an additional million-and-a-half Arab-American Christians. Because of an astonishing array of ways to minimize the statistics, these are modest estimates. On the other hand, the Jewish vote is always estimated at five million people.
One thing that is certain is that if Arab- and Muslim-Americans are combined, their numbers are considerably higher than even the highest estimate of the Jewish vote. Another given is that nearly 80 to 90 percent of American Jews vote for Democratic candidates. As Republican former Secretary of State James Baker once said in a pejorative way, “the Jews don’t vote for us anyway.
So there are lessons to be learned as the possibility of a bloc vote reemerges. For example, the Hispanic vote in the United States is increasingly up for grabs. It may more likely go Democratic than Republican, but it is not yet clear which way the Hispanic community is actually leaning. The same is a matter of consideration for African-Americans. Up until now, a vast majority of African-Americans have voted Democratic. But this, too is changing, ever so slowly. It is true that some African-Americans accuse such distinguished Republicans as Secretary of State Colin Powell and National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice of being merely “token blacks”. But in fact, many African-Americans cannot help but notice that Powell and Rice are in two of the top national positions, and in this administration play extremely important roles.
Whatever the Democrats may say, there will be some fallout from the African-American community in favor of the Republicans. The point is simply that every time a limited number of Hispanic- or African-Americans decide to vote against their community majority, the effectiveness of a bloc vote is reduced. But, when an entire community switches its vote, as Jewish Americans did to oust Georgia Representative Cynthia McKinney, the result can be very effective. McKinney’s Republican rival took the Jewish votes and the election.
In 2004, probably both Democrats and Republicans will realize that they can now swing an election nationwide if the election is relatively close. Let’s assume that Democrats are wondering how to gain Democratic votes without alienating the Jewish vote. Similarly, the Republicans will have to do something to maintain their narrow margin. Given the fact that many Muslim- and Arab-Americans have been deeply disappointed by the Republicans, I would guess that senior Republican strategist Karl Rove is thinking about the subject at this very moment. Let us hope that the Democrats are thinking about the same problem, and particularly about how to avoid writing off Muslim- and Arab-Americans voters.
Given the Muslim- and Arab-Americans’ current disappointment with the Republicans, and earlier disappointments with Democrats, the possibility of third-party votes is crossing everyone’s mind. But the grim reality is that a third-party vote, even for such a popular candidate amongst Arab-Americans as Ralph Nader, is a wasted vote. In fact, third-party candidates usually have the counterproductive effect of removing any possibility of influence from their supporters. Also, one of the major parties is usually somewhat more acceptable than the other.
Muslim- and Arab-Americans should at least choose the major party, Democratic or Republican, that is most useful to them and receptive to their ideas.
— Richard H. Curtiss is executive editor of the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs
Arab News Opinion 6 January 2003
